Minimum passage width by robot mower: the full table

What a passage-width figure is, and what it is not

Three different numbers get called passage width in this category and they answer different questions. The first is a capability claim: the narrowest gap the mower is stated to physically drive through, which is what Ecovacs prints in its spec table. The second is an installation requirement: the minimum width the owner must leave for the machine to work reliably, which is how Husqvarna and Worx phrase it. The third is a mapping constraint: the minimum width of a channel or transport path drawn in the app to connect two areas, which is how Mammotion and Segway phrase it.

They are not interchangeable. A capability figure describes the machine; a requirement figure describes what the maker will support. When Ecovacs says its mower goes through 0.7 m and Worx says the passage must be wider than 1 m, those are not necessarily competing measurements of the same thing, and neither maker publishes a test method that would let anyone check. We record each as its maker phrased it and label which kind it is.

One more distinction matters before the table. A passage width is a geometry spec. A mower with a published passage figure has not been shown to navigate your particular side yard, because none of these figures carries a stated surface, slope, obstacle or positioning-signal condition. We have not driven any of these machines through anything.

The table: published passage, channel and corridor widths

Every figure below was read off the maker's own page this week, and every source is named beside it. Nothing here comes from our data files, because no passage-width field exists in them.

Ecovacs publishes the only figure under 1 m in the set, and publishes it twice in two units. The US product page for the GOAT O1000 RTK carries a spec-table row reading Narrow passage width (ft) 2.3, and its feature copy states that the mower navigates a path as tight as 0.7 m. The footnote attached to that copy states that 0.7 m refers to the experimental result operated by ECOVACS Laboratory, that the ECOVACS GOAT O Family is able to go through the path as narrow as 0.7 m. 2.3 ft and 0.7 m are the same figure in two units, which is at least internally consistent.

The other three published figures all land on 1 m. Husqvarna's Wireless Automower FAQs page on husqvarna.com/us states that passages must be a minimum of 1 m/3.3 ft wide, in a section explaining why a stay-out zone can leave a passage too narrow for the mower. The same page publishes a second, larger figure for transport paths: it states that a corridor width under 2 m/7 ft may prevent the mower from following the transport path and reaching its destination, and instructs setting the corridor width for the transport path to a minimum of 2 to 5 m/7 to 16 ft. Worx publishes 1 m for the Landroid Vision WR208 in the official owner's manual hosted on worx.com, instructing owners to make sure the narrow passage for Landroid Vision to pass is wider than 3.3 feet (1 m). Mammotion publishes 1 m as a channel rule in its support knowledge base article How to Create Channel, which states that the channel should be wider than 1 m (3.3 feet) and should be free from significant bumps. That article sits in the YUKA mini section of Mammotion's knowledge base, so we cite it for the YUKA mini 2 1000H and flag the section rather than asserting it covers the LUBA line.

• Ecovacs GOAT O1000 RTK: 2.3 ft narrow passage width, US spec table; equivalently 0.7 m in feature copy, flagged as an ECOVACS Laboratory experimental result.
• Husqvarna Automower 420 iQ: passages a minimum of 1 m/3.3 ft, Wireless Automower FAQs, husqvarna.com/us.
• Husqvarna Automower 420 iQ, transport paths: corridor width set to a minimum of 2 to 5 m/7 to 16 ft, same page.
• Worx Landroid Vision WR208: narrow passage wider than 3.3 feet (1 m), official owner's manual on worx.com.
• Mammotion channels, YUKA mini 2 1000H section of the support knowledge base: channel wider than 1 m (3.3 feet), free from significant bumps.
• Segway Navimow i110N and Navimow X350: no passage width published.
• Dreame A3 AWD Pro 3500: no passage width published.
• Sunseeker X7: no passage width published.

Where nothing is published, and what sits nearby

Segway is the most instructive absence, because it publishes a great deal about narrow areas without publishing a width for the machines we track. Its Navimow Academy article on missing areas, dated July 9, 2026, addresses narrow passages directly and explains the failure rather than specifying the gap: it states that if the walls are too near, the multi-directional obstacle detection considers them obstacles and the mower returns before it enters the passage, and that walls also block the antenna signal so the mower cannot determine its position. The numeric figures on that page, 6.6 ft of clearance from trees and buildings for the antenna and charging station, 1.6 ft clearance at the sides of the station and 6.5 ft at the front, are siting requirements for the hardware, not a passage spec.

Segway's multi-zone article, dated June 11, 2026, gets closer with a channel rule: it states there should be no obstacles within 3.3 ft (1 meter) inside the channel. That is a clearance rule around the path rather than a minimum path width. The one place Segway does publish a width, a support-portal article titled why the mower cannot pass through lawn areas narrower than 1 meter in width after VisionFence is installed, is scoped to the Navimow H series and states only that Segway recommends the width of the mowing area be greater than 1 m. The H series is not on our roster, so we report that as a figure for a different product line, the same way we flag regional support articles elsewhere.

Dreame publishes nothing. The A3 AWD Pro 3500 product page markets navigation under trees and along narrow paths, and publishes an obstacle-crossing height footnoted at 2.16 in from Dreame lab testing, but no passage width appears anywhere on it. Sunseeker publishes nothing for the X7 on either its product page or its specs page. It does publish narrow passage navigation of 80 cm or greater for its S4, which tells you the figure exists in Sunseeker's spec vocabulary and simply is not applied to the X7. That is the pattern our guide to what yard robot makers do not publish tracks across the category: the same fields go missing, and they go missing selectively.

Passage width against cutting width and machine width

Cutting width is published for every mower we track, and it is the wrong number to reason from. The GOAT O1000 RTK publishes a cutting width of 8.66 in and a 2.3 ft (27.6 in) narrow passage, more than three times its cut. The Landroid Vision WR208 publishes a cutting diameter of 7.9 in in its owner's manual and requires a passage wider than 39.6 in, five times the cut. Cutting width tells you how many passes cover a lawn; it says nothing about whether the machine fits the gap.

Machine width is closer but still not the number. Husqvarna publishes a product size width of 21.4 in for the Automower 420 iQ on the same US site that publishes the 3.3 ft passage minimum, so the required gap is roughly double the body. Ecovacs is the tightest ratio in the set at 2.3 ft against a machine it describes as ultra-slim, which is presumably the point of publishing the figure at all. None of the makers explains what the margin covers, so we will not attribute it to positioning error, obstacle-detection standoff, turning radius or anything else.

The practical consequence is that the published cutting-width and dimension rows in our tables cannot be used to answer the side-yard question. If you have a genuinely tight channel, the passage figure is the only datasheet number that speaks to it, and it exists for four makers. For the framework on how cutting width and height are published and where the measurement bases differ, see robot mower cutting height and width.

The Ecovacs figure, read carefully

Ecovacs publishes the lowest number in the set and also publishes the most qualification around it, which is better practice than an unqualified figure and still not a field measurement. The 0.7 m claim is footnoted as an ECOVACS Laboratory experimental result, and the spec-table row carrying 2.3 ft appears without a footnote on the same page, so the maker's own page presents the figure at two different levels of qualification.

The same footnote block carries a comparative claim that deserves flagging rather than repeating as fact. Ecovacs states that its 0.7 m narrow-path passability represents a 30 percent performance improvement over standard models, and defines standard models in the footnote as competitive robotic mowers chosen by ECOVACS Laboratory that are only able to go through paths wider than 1 m. That is a manufacturer testing competitors it selected, and it does not name them. We record it as Ecovacs's own claim about its own test, and note that the three competing figures we found independently, from Husqvarna, Worx and Mammotion, do land at 1 m.

Two things follow. First, the 1 m cluster is real and comes from three unrelated makers, so a gap under about 3.3 ft rules out most of this field on published guidance regardless of what any single machine can do. Second, if your layout is decided by a gap between 0.7 m and 1 m, you are buying against one laboratory figure from one manufacturer, and there is no independent published test of it anywhere we could find.

Where the record has gaps

Worx is the clearest example of a maker publishing more than one passage figure without reconciling them. The Landroid Vision owner's manual on worx.com requires a passage wider than 1 m, while Worx's own installation wiki for the Landroid Classic line states that thanks to AIA navigation the mower handles narrow passages with a minimum width of 60 cm without additional guidance. Those are different product lines with different navigation systems, so they are not strictly contradictory, but a buyer searching the Worx site will find both numbers with no note explaining which applies to which machine.

None of the four published figures carries a measurement method, a surface condition, a slope condition or a tolerance. None states whether the width is measured between hard obstacles, between grass edges, or between mapped boundaries, which are three different measurements in an actual side yard. And none states what happens between the published minimum and failure, so there is no published notion of a marginal passage.

Two more absences worth naming. No maker publishes a minimum passage length, only width, even though a long narrow channel and a short one are different navigation problems. And no maker publishes a passage figure for a discontinued model, so the EcoFlow Blade and the LUBA 2 AWD 3000HX have no figure at all in the record. If your lot is small enough that this spec decides the purchase, the sub-quarter-acre field is laid out in best robot mowers for small yards, and how these makers document connecting two areas at all is covered in multi-zone mowing.